Habeas Corpus

18,782 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Rayfield Byrd v. Louie L. Wainwright
  722 F.2d 716· 11th Cir.· 1984-01-13 ·cited 10×
  The court held that an indigent prisoner's inability to access his trial transcript for discretionary review may violate his constitutional right of access to the courts, requiring an evidentiary hearing.
• Thompson v. State OF Mo.
  724 F.2d 1314· 8th Cir.· 1984-01-10 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the nondisclosure of information regarding another suspect did not affect the outcome of the trial, and that the petitioner's double jeopardy and dangerous offender claims lacked merit.
• Jones v. Superintendent OF Rahway State Prison & The Attorney Gen. of the State of N.J.
  725 F.2d 40· 3d Cir.· 1984-01-06 ·cited 10×
  The court affirmed the denial of habeas corpus relief, not because of failure to exhaust state remedies, but because the petitioner's claims were not cognizable in a federal habeas corpus proceeding.
• Smith v. E.P. Perini
  723 F.2d 478· 6th Cir.· 1983-12-15 ·cited 10×
  The dissenting judge argues that the identification procedures were unnecessarily suggestive and created a substantial likelihood of irreparable misidentification, violating due process.
• Alpha Otis O'Daniel Stephens v. Kemp
  722 F.2d 627· 11th Cir.· 1983-12-13 ·cited 10×
• Bruno v. Rushen
  721 F.2d 1193· 9th Cir.· 1983-12-12 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the prosecutor's comments implying guilt from the defendant's exercise of his right to counsel constituted constitutional error that was not harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.
• Len Terry Jackson v. Torres
  720 F.2d 877· 5th Cir.· 1983-12-05 ·cited 10×
  A Section 1983 action challenging the duration of confinement must be treated as a habeas corpus matter and requires exhaustion of federal habeas corpus remedies.
• White v. W.J. Estelle, Jr.
  720 F.2d 415· 5th Cir.· 1983-11-28 ·cited 10×
  The court affirmed the district court's grant of habeas corpus relief, finding that the introduction of psychiatric testimony at the penalty hearing violated the defendant's constitutional rights.
• Benny Williams v. Kullman
  722 F.2d 1048· 2d Cir.· 1983-11-28 ·cited 10×
  The court held that while sua sponte dismissal of the habeas petition was procedurally improper, the petition should ultimately be dismissed on the merits because the evidence presented at trial was sufficient to support the jury's finding of intent.
• Kellotat v. Hoyt C. Cupp
  719 F.2d 1027· 9th Cir.· 1983-11-03 ·cited 10×
  A petitioner must exhaust state post-conviction remedies for claims of denial of appellate counsel, even if an interlocutory petition was presented to the state supreme court.
• Welton v. Crispus NIX
  719 F.2d 969· 8th Cir.· 1983-10-31 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the Iowa courts' interpretation of the willful injury statute was not so unexpected or outlandish as to violate the Due Process Clause.
• Weygandt v. Look
  718 F.2d 952· 9th Cir.· 1983-10-19 ·cited 10×
  An interlocutory order denying a motion for appointment of counsel in a habeas corpus proceeding is not an appealable final decision under 28 U.S.C. § 1291.
• Sanders v. Israel
  717 F.2d 422· 7th Cir.· 1983-09-21 ·cited 10×
  The court affirmed the denial of the habeas corpus petition, finding no constitutional error in the petitioner's conviction. Claims regarding illegal arrest evidence, prosecutorial misconduct, jury instructions, and the presumptive intent instruction were all rejected.
• Alvaro L. Hernandez, Jr. v. W.J. Estelle, Jr.
  711 F.2d 619· 5th Cir.· 1983-08-08 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court erred by not conducting a de novo review of the magistrate's report and recommendations based on the hearing transcript.
• Griswold v. Greer
  712 F.2d 1200· 7th Cir.· 1983-07-27 ·cited 10×
  The court affirmed the denial of the habeas corpus petition, holding that the petitioner's constitutional rights were not violated by the admission of identification testimony and that a due process claim regarding newly discovered evidence was not properly before the court.
• Szeto v. Rushen
  709 F.2d 1340· 9th Cir.· 1983-07-08 ·cited 10×
  The court held that a federal habeas corpus petition containing both exhausted and unexhausted claims must be dismissed in its entirety, without reaching the merits of any claim.
• Bullard v. W.J. Estelle, Jr.
  708 F.2d 1020· 5th Cir.· 1983-07-05 ·cited 10×
  The court vacated the district court's grant of habeas relief and remanded with instructions to dismiss the case with prejudice due to lack of a live case or controversy.
• Verdell Hill, Jr. v. State
  434 So. 2d 974· Fla. 5th DCA· 1983-06-23 ·cited 10×
  Verdell Hill petitioned for habeas corpus, claiming he was unlawfully imprisoned because the trial court failed to sentence him under Florida's Youthful Offender Act. The Fifth District Court of Appeal held that robbery with a firearm constitutes a first-degree felony, not a life
• Healy v. Maggio
  706 F.2d 698· 5th Cir.· 1983-06-09 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the jury instruction regarding intent was harmless error because the evidence of guilt was overwhelming, and insufficient evidence does not warrant habeas relief.
• Brunelle v. C.L. Norvell
  433 So. 2d 19· Fla. 4th DCA· 1983-06-08 ·cited 10×
  Gerard Marcel Brunelle sought a writ of habeas corpus to resist extradition to another state. The court affirmed the trial court's denial of the petition, holding that Brunelle failed to overcome the presumption that he was the person named in the rendition warrant and that the f
• Taylor v. Curry
  708 F.2d 886· 2d Cir.· 1983-06-07 ·cited 10×
  The court held that while the exclusion of the draft separation agreement was an error, it did not deprive the petitioner of a fundamentally fair trial, and thus habeas corpus relief was not warranted.
• Young v. Rees
  707 F.2d 935· 6th Cir.· 1983-06-03 ·cited 10×
  The court held that any error in admitting testimony regarding the defendant's post-Miranda silence was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.
• McPHAIL v. Warden, Attica Corr. Facility, & Attorney Gen. of the State of N.Y.
  707 F.2d 67· 2d Cir.· 1983-05-12 ·cited 10×
  A federal court may not consider a fourth amendment claim on habeas corpus if the state provided an opportunity to litigate it, even if the state court denied the claim on its merits.
• Dyas v. Art Lockhart
  705 F.2d 993· 8th Cir.· 1983-04-21 ·cited 10×
  The court held that a judge's relationship to prosecutors, standing alone, is insufficient to raise a conclusive presumption of bias, but remanded for a hearing on whether the petitioner personally waived the judge's disqualification offer.
• Parton v. Wyrick
  704 F.2d 415· 8th Cir.· 1983-04-12 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the appellant failed to demonstrate ineffective assistance of appellate counsel for not raising the self-representation issue, nor did he show prejudice from the failure to object to prior convictions.
• In the Interest of W.B.
  428 So. 2d 309· Fla. 4th DCA· 1983-03-16 ·cited 10×
  A fourteen-year-old juvenile appeals a 1979 adjudication of delinquency for breaking and entering, arguing the guilty plea was involuntary. The court reverses and remands for an evidentiary hearing to determine plea voluntariness, holding that a juvenile has habeas corpus rights
• Irby v. State OF Mo.
  427 So. 2d 367· Fla. 2d DCA· 1983-03-02 ·cited 10×
  Samuel Irby, a Florida prisoner with a Missouri parole violation detainer, sought habeas corpus relief arguing the detainer violated his speedy trial rights under the Interstate Agreement on Detainers Act. The Florida Second District Court of Appeal reversed its prior precedent a
• United States v. Sutton
  700 F.2d 1078· 6th Cir.· 1983-03-01 ·cited 10×
  The court held that consecutive sentences for RICO and predicate drug offenses do not violate the Double Jeopardy Clause when Congress intends to authorize multiple punishments, and that the government sufficiently proved the existence of a RICO enterprise.
• Bowen v. A.L. Murphy & the Attorney Gen. of the State of Okla.
  698 F.2d 381· 10th Cir.· 1983-01-31 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court did not err in dismissing the habeas corpus petition as delayed under Rule 9(a) because the state demonstrated prejudice and the petitioner failed to rebut it or explain the delay.
• Siano v. Justices OF Massachusetts
  698 F.2d 52· 1st Cir.· 1983-01-21 ·cited 10×
  A prosecutor is absolutely immune from civil liability for actions taken in initiating a prosecution and presenting the state's case, and a claim against state Justices for affirming a conviction, even if erroneous, does not state a constitutional claim actionable under § 1983.
• Loveday v. Davis
  697 F.2d 135· 6th Cir.· 1983-01-05 ·cited 10×
  A federal court is not required to examine the trial transcript when a habeas petition alleges insufficiency of evidence if the petitioner does not challenge the state court's factual determinations or invoke exceptions to the presumption of correctness.
• Lydon v. Justices OF the Boston Mun. Court
  698 F.2d 1· 1st Cir.· 1982-12-30 ·cited 10×
  The court held that a defendant's election of a two-tier trial system does not constitute a waiver of the right to challenge the sufficiency of the evidence presented at the first-tier trial.
• Holguin v. Raines
  695 F.2d 372· 9th Cir.· 1982-12-23 ·cited 10×
  The dissent argues that the majority's interpretation of Mileham improperly expands its scope, and that under Weaver v. Graham, the state's retroactive application of parole guidelines violates the ex post facto clause.
• Ware v. King
  694 F.2d 89· 5th Cir.· 1982-12-20 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the petitioner failed to demonstrate an actual conflict of interest by his counsel, and thus, the district court did not err in dismissing his habeas corpus petition.
• Ellis R. Nieb v. Jago
  695 F.2d 228· 6th Cir.· 1982-12-16 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the jury instruction regarding the burden of proof for self-defense did not violate due process because the prosecution still bore the burden of proving all elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt. Furthermore, the appellant's failure to make a specifi
• Hobert Jones v. W.J. Estelle, Jr.
  693 F.2d 547· 5th Cir.· 1982-12-14 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the appeal must be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was filed significantly outside the prescribed 30-day period.
• Elroy Lynn Wabasha v. Solem
  694 F.2d 155· 8th Cir.· 1982-12-01 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the defendant did not knowingly and intelligently waive his right to counsel because the trial court's inquiry was perfunctory and lacked a penetrating discussion of the consequences.
• Ashby v. Wyrick
  693 F.2d 789· 8th Cir.· 1982-11-30 ·cited 10×
  The court emphasizes that procedural rules in post-conviction proceedings should not be rigidly applied, especially when constitutional rights are implicated, to avoid injustice and promote efficiency.
• Hatton v. T.M. Keohane
  693 F.2d 88· 9th Cir.· 1982-11-16 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the Regional Parole Commissioner did not exceed his authority in modifying the presumptive parole release date.
• Vogel v. Percy
  691 F.2d 843· 7th Cir.· 1982-10-29 ·cited 10×
  The admission of a witness's prior inconsistent, unsworn statement as substantive evidence did not violate the defendant's Sixth Amendment right of confrontation or Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment due process rights, provided the witness is available for cross-examination and the
• Wayne v. Raines
  690 F.2d 685· 9th Cir.· 1982-10-18 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the petitioner's guilty plea was validly entered, as the trial judge thoroughly explained the sentencing terms and the petitioner, with counsel's advice, understood them.
• Inglese v. Warden, U. S. Penitentiary, Atlanta, Georgia
  687 F.2d 362· 11th Cir.· 1982-10-01 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the notice of appeal was timely filed, and the district court properly reviewed the prison disciplinary board's decision based on the 'any evidence' standard.
• Young v. United States Parole Comm'n
  682 F.2d 1105· 5th Cir.· 1982-08-09 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the Parole Commission's classification of offense severity, calculation of parole hearing dates, aggregation of consecutive sentences, and failure to provide Miranda warnings were all within its statutory authority and did not violate the petitioner's rights.
• Country v. Parratt
  684 F.2d 588· 8th Cir.· 1982-08-04 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the gender-based forcible rape statute did not violate the Equal Protection Clause because the unique harm of potential pregnancy justified heightened sanctions for male perpetrators attacking female victims.
• Malloy v. Purvis
  681 F.2d 736· 11th Cir.· 1982-07-29 ·cited 10×
  The court concurred in the result because the petitioner is serving a life sentence without parole, rendering prior convictions irrelevant to collateral consequences.
• Harding v. State OF N.C.
  683 F.2d 850· 4th Cir.· 1982-07-20 ·cited 10×
  A federal habeas court cannot accept a state's conditional waiver of the exhaustion requirement for unexhausted claims; such a petition must be dismissed as mixed.
• Reddie McSHANE, Jr. v. Estelle
  683 F.2d 867· 5th Cir.· 1982-07-19 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the petitioner's reasons for not presenting all claims in his first federal habeas petition were sufficient to warrant an evidentiary hearing on whether he abused the writ.
• Williams v. Engle
  683 F.2d 152· 6th Cir.· 1982-07-14 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court's denial of habeas corpus relief must be vacated and the case remanded because the record was inadequate to determine if the constitutional error was harmless.
• Rhodes v. Foster
  682 F.2d 711· 8th Cir.· 1982-07-01 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court correctly denied the habeas corpus petition because sufficient evidence supported the conviction and the prosecutor's remarks did not deprive the appellant of a fair trial.
• Ford v. Wainwright
  415 So. 2d 76· Fla. 1st DCA· 1982-06-04 ·cited 10×
  Ford seeks habeas corpus relief for a belated appeal, claiming his retained counsel failed to file a notice of appeal despite being asked to do so and falsely told him the judge had denied the appeal. The court held that ineffective assistance of counsel claims apply equally to r